Author: Ophelia Benson

  • After five years, they give me a brush

    Because Ken pointed out the resemblance to Nigel McCullough – I give you, the great Ken Shabby.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhm4SMlGnbk

  • The Observatory on Theocracy

    Sigmund keeps an eye on the Iona Institute, and he alerted me to its report on a report by a Christian panic-group about “attacks on Christians.” The report on the report is indeed risible.

    Christians are the victims in 85pc of ‘hate crimes’ in Europe according to a new report published yesterday.

    The report, published by the Observatory on Intolerance and Discrimination against Christians in Europe, a European body established to record instances of anti-Christian bias, provides a series of examples of attacks on Christians in 2011.

    Spoiler alert: the “attacks” are not “attacks.”

    Among the examples cited in the report were:

    • In Spain, students were prevented from attending weekly Mass on a Wednesday because of a protest by secular students until the university could guarantee the safety of the Mass-going students
    • In Germany, a mother of 12 children, Irene Wiens, was jailed for 43 days for refusing to enroll her children in a State-run sex education class which she deemed to be too permissive
    • In the UK, a Conservative MP, Mike Weatherley, has called for a ban on marriages in Christian churches if they continue to refuse to perform same-sex marriages
    • In Jersey, postal workers refused to distribute CD copies of St Mark’s Gospel after deeming it offensive material
    • In Spain, a Catholic GP was forced to refer women for abortions by a court in Malaga
    • New guidelines in the Netherlands say that doctors who have ethical objections to euthanasia must refer patients to doctors who will carry out euthanasia

    It’s a very theocratic mind that sees any of that as “attacks on Christians.”  It’s a very theocratic mind that pretends to see any of that as “attacks on Christians” for the purposes of bullying secularists.

    Launching the report, Dr Gudrun Kugler, the director of the Observatory, referred to research showing that “85pc of hate crimes in Europe are directed against Christians”…She said that her organisation had also noticed increasing examples of professionial restrictions for Christians: “a restrictive application of freedom of conscience leads to professions such as magistrates, doctors, nurses and midwives as well as pharmacists”.

    See? Theocratic. Dr Kugler thinks magistrates, doctors, nurses, midwives, and pharmacists should be able to refuse to do their jobs on religious grounds, while sane people think that people shouldn’t take jobs they’re going to refuse to do on religious grounds.

  • Won’t be silenced

    Jesus and Mo don’t like all this talk of homophobia. It’s just a shaming tactic!

  • Equinox

    Daffodils are starting to bloom, but slowly. I want more.

    I didn’t see many in Manchester, either, doubtless because I was in the heart of the city except for that one walk I took to the University. I want more.

    Global warming . . . dress rehearsal

  • We have ways of making you silent

    It gets worse – the castration story.

    The Toronto Star reports

    The Deetman Commision, set up by two Catholic bodies, the Conference of Bishops and the Dutch Religious Conference, concluded last year that tens of thousands of children had been abused by Catholic clergy in the Netherlands since 1945.

    The commission was set up by two Catholic bodies, one being the Conference of Bishops.

    Hello? Fox? Henhouse? Custodiet? Custodies?

    Mr Madoff, would you draw up a report for us on how you defrauded people out of billions of dollars?

    Col Qadaffi, can we get you to set up a commission on torture and human rights abuses by your regime?

    Mr Milosevic, could you and a few of your friends investigate war crimes in Bosnia for us, thanks so much?

    It’s Radio Netherlands that first blew this open, along with NRC Handelsblad.

    We now know that former Dutch cabinet minister Wim Deetman did not meet the expectations he raised when he chaired the commission of inquiry into sexual abuse in the Roman Catholic church. He did not get to the bottom of the abuse scandal or reveal all of the horrors that took place behind church doors in the Netherlands.

    We know this thanks to investigative journalist Joep Dohmen of the newspaper NRC Handelsblad. Dohmen wrote about a boarding school student who had been sexually abused by a Dutch monk. When the former student reported the abuse to the police in 1956, he was brought to a Roman Catholic psychiatric ward, declared a homosexual and then castrated. The same surgery was probably performed on at least ten other schoolmates of his who tried to blow the whistle on abuse.

    The main abuser in this case was ‘Gregorius,’ the brother superior of the Roman Catholic Harreveld boarding school in the east of the Netherlands.

    And nothing was done about it because the elite didn’t want anything done about it.

    The bigger picture is this: Victor Marijnen was just one member of a wider elite of Catholic notables who wielded vast power in the 1950s. They were captains of industry, chairmen of commissions, judges, high-ranking civil servants and politicians. And it was through this old boys network that abuse at Harreveld and other Roman Catholic institutions was covered up.

    In short, the Harreveld castration story reveals collusion between institutions, bishops, politicians, the police and the justice system that enabled sexual abuse in the church to continue unpunished for decades on end.

    Funny how similar to Ireland it sounds, when we don’t normally think of the Netherlands as in the grip of the church the way we do Ireland.

     

     

  • We’re here to help you

    More from that bottomless file, The Evil Deeds of the Catholic Church. This time it’s in the Netherlands.

    Government inspectors were aware that minors were being castrated while being looked after in Catholic-run psychiatric institutions, local paper the Limburger reported on Monday.

    The NRC reported on Saturday at least one boy under the age of 16 was castrated to ‘help’ his homosexual feelings while in Catholic church care in the 1950s.

    …

    But there are indications at least 10 other boys were also castrated, the NRC reported on Saturday. The claims were not included in the Deetman report on sexual abuse within the Catholic church which was published at the end of last year.

    The paper says the one confirmed case concerned a boy – Henk Heithuis – who reported being sexually abused by priests to the police in 1956. After giving evidence, he was placed in a Catholic-run psychiatric institution where he was then castrated because of his ‘homosexual behaviour’.

    Holy sweet hopping christ on a griddle – he was what where he was what because of what? 

    He was placed in a Catholic-run psychiatric institution where he was then castrated because of his ‘homosexual behaviour’.

    Oh my god.

    The paper says the Deetman committee was informed about the castrations in writing but did not include mention of them in its report because ‘there were few leads for further research’.

    The Deetman committee was set up by the church itself in 2010 after the sexual abuse scandal broke. It reported in December having identified some 800 priests and monks who abused children in their care between 1945 and 1985.

    …

    MPs are now calling for a full parliamentary investigation into the abuse scandal because of concerns about the neutrality of the Deetman inquiry. Govenment MPs and the anti-immigration PVV have so far blocked calls for a formal inquiry, the NRC said on Monday.

    And these are the people who want to tell us all what to do, and impose their warped ideas about sex and contraception and abortion on all of us, and “fight militant secularism” with the help of other reactionary theocrats around the globe.

     

  • Shoot first, plead self-defense later

    Clearly I’m behind with my homework. I need to find out more about these “Stand Your Ground” laws, of which there are apparently 21 around the US.

    It gives the benefit of the doubt to a person who claims self-defense, regardless of whether the killing takes place on a street, in a car or in a bar — not just in one’s home, the standard cited in more restrictive laws. In Florida, if people feel they are in imminent danger from being killed or badly injured, they do not have to retreat, even if it would seem reasonable to do so. They have the right to “stand their ground” and protect themselves.

    Say what? In Florida, even in a situation where retreat is possible and safe, they can opt to stand still and kill someone?

    The story that seems to be emerging is that knife-edge vigilante George Zimmerman saw Trayvon Martin walking along a street in a “gated community” and decided to follow him and call the police to report the fact that Martin was walking along a street; the police told Zimmerman to stop following Martin; Zimmerman went on following Martin anyway, and caught up with him and shot him. Is that about right?

    But they have this deranged law, so Zimmerman can just say it was self-defense, and the police can’t arrest him and prosecutors can’t prosecute him.

    This is crazy. It’s stark raving nuts.

    The lawyer for Trayvon’s parents, Benjamin Crump, said at a news conference on Tuesday that Trayvon was speaking to his girlfriend on his cellphone minutes before he was shot, telling her that a man was following him as he walked home.

    Trayvon told his girlfriend he was being confronted, Mr. Crump said. She told him to run, and he said he would “walk fast.” Trayvon was headed to the home of his father’s girlfriend after a visit to a convenience store, carrying Skittles and a can of iced tea.

    Trayvon asked, “Why are you following me?” Mr. Crump said. The girl then heard a faraway voice ask, “What are you doing around here?” Mr. Crump added. Then Trayvon’s voice falls away.

    “She completely blows Zimmerman’s self-defense claim out of the water,” Mr. Crump said.

    Mr. Zimmerman had reported a “suspicious” person to 911 shortly before the encounter, saying a black male was checking out the houses and staring at him. Mr. Zimmerman, a criminal justice major, often patrolled the neighborhood. He had placed 46 calls to 911 in 14 months, for reports including open windows and suspicious persons.

    In the 911 call, Mr. Zimmerman, using an expletive and speaking of Trayvon, said they “always get away.” The 911 dispatcher told him not to get out of the car and said the police were on their way. Mr. Zimmerman was already outside. A dispute began. Mr. Zimmerman told the police that Trayvon attacked him and that he fired in self-defense.

    A “suspicious” person – because he was walking down the street. Aren’t there laws against calling the police for frivolous or invented reasons? That’s always been my impression. It’s also always been my impression that we’re allowed to walk down the street. Mind you, I do sometimes wonder, when I see those Neighborhood Watch signs in people’s windows – but I nevertheless retained the belief that as a matter of law we were all allowed to walk down the street.

    The state attorney in Tallahassee, Willie Meggs, who fought the law when it was proposed, said: “The consequences of the law have been devastating around the state. It’s almost insane what we are having to deal with.”

    It is increasingly used by gang members fighting gang members, drug dealers battling drug dealers and people involved in road rage encounters. Confrontations at a bar are also common: someone looks at someone the wrong way or bothers someone’s girlfriend.

    Under the old law, a person being threatened with a gun or a knife had a duty to try to get away from the situation, if possible. Now that person has a right to grab a gun (or knife, or ice pick, as happened in one case) and use it, without an attempt to retreat.

    We are a crazy people. We must be, to allow this kind of thing.

    Dan Gross, the president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, says that his organization tracks laws in 21 states that extend the self-defense doctrine beyond the home. The usual label for such laws — “stand your ground” — is politically charged, he said, suggesting that a more apt label would be “Shoot first, ask questions later.”

    Laws like the one in Florida allow situations like the Trayvon Martin killing, he said. “We’re heartbroken, but we’re not surprised.”

    I feel dirty.

  • Minors castrated in Catholic-run psychiatric institutions

    One boy reported being sexually abused by priests to the police in 1956. He was placed in a Catholic-run psychiatric institution and castrated because of his ‘homosexual behaviour’.

  • Cancer conference barred from using council’s meeting hall

    Italian oncologist Tullio Simoncini, who says he was struck off for using sodium bicarbonate in place of chemotherapy, was due to attend.

  • Texas school officials ordered to apologize in prayer case

    Chief U.S. District Judge Fred Biery issued a “non-Kumbaya” order after officials allegedly made comments considered disparaging by the family that sued the district over school prayer.

  • Columnist shocked that Rapture Pet insurance was a joke

    Has anyone told him that the Colbert Report is also a joke? And warned him about the Onion?

  • Pastor on trial for encouraging corporal punishment of children

    The prosecution argued Phil Caminiti influenced church members on how to discipline their infant and toddler children, using rods, dowels and other spanking methods.

  • TAM 2012

    Twitter is all abuzz and agog because registration for TAM 2012 is open today, and a list of speakers is posted (with more to follow). I’m one.

  • Hands off

    The Vatican has issued a report on priestly child rape in Ireland. The Vatican is happy to see “the deep faith of many men and women” despite all this brouhaha about child rape. The Vatican knows what to do moving forward: it is to have “deeper formation in the content of the faith for young people and adults.”

    And there’s another thing.

     Since the Visitators also encountered a certain tendency, not dominant but nevertheless fairly widespread among priests, religious and laity, to hold theological opinions at variance with the teachings of the Magisterium, this serious situation requires particular attention, directed primarily towards improved theological formation. It must be stressed that dissent from the fundamental teachings of the Church is not the authentic path towards renewal.

    That’s the important bit. The power and authority of the (all-male, all celibate) priests and bishops. It’s the male celibate priests and bishops who do the Magisterium, and nobody else is allowed to touch it.

  • Ireland: Vatican expresses “dismay” at priestly child abuse

    “The Visitators also encountered a certain tendency…to hold theological opinions at variance with the teachings of the Magisterium, this serious situation requires particular attention.”

  • I get email

    I got one today from someone who has commented here a few times as nmcc or NMcC, and who commented yesterday to tell me how wrong I am about the word “cunt” and to say “Sarah Palin is a cunt.” I deleted that comment and put him – his email address showed he’s a Nigel – in moderation. The message I got this morning expressed surprise at the deletion of the comment. (It started with “Hi” – this is more significant than you might think.) I replied, brusquely,

    Really? You would have thought “Sarah Palin is a cunt” was well within my commenting policy? I’ve been very explicit about that. Other things not within my commenting policy: “Al Sharpton is a nigger.” “Woody Allen is a kike.” “Salman Rushdie is a wog.”

    I hope that clears things up.

    ——– Ophelia Benson, Editor Butterflies and Wheels ———

    He replied. This is how he replied:

    Dear Ms Benson,
    Thank you for taking the time to reply to my email.
    I must say, I don’t expect much in the way of civility from the ‘new’ atheist type, but I confess I thought elementary good manners by way of an introductory salutation might not have been beyond you. Obviously not.
    In regard to my comment: This is simply a difference of opinion, though one that you have blown up into a difference of principle – or, rather, you have attempted to do so. In my opinion (I assume I’m allowed to have an opinion since we don’t live in a ‘new’ atheist world yet, and neither, thank Christ, are we ever likely to!), and as I said in my comment, the word cunt, like the word dick, and like the word asshole, are rarely, if ever, used to refer to a particular anatomical feature of a male or female. Words can take on a life of their own. Language evolves and grows and changes to the degree that words are unrecognisable from what they first meant, implied or described. The word gay, of course, is an obvious example.
    I use the word cunt all the time. So do a lot of people I know. I never use it with the slightest thought of it having any connection with the female genitalia. To my knowledge, neither does anyone else.
    So, in fact, you are quite simply wrong to ascribe any inference of misogyny to me or anyone I know. Indeed, your introducing the terms nigger, kike and wog,  simply shows how ludicrously – not to mention hysterically and self-righteously – wrong you are.  The simple fact is, there is NO comparison to be made with the words mentioned. All 3 of those words, as far as I’m aware, were specifically coined to refer to others in a racist and openly hateful and derogatory way. Those words refer to specific people and are used to degrade and denigrate those specific people. The word cunt is NOT used in any such way by the majority of people who use it. It most certainly is not used to denigrate or degrade women.
    You have a different opinion. Good for you. Keep advocating your point of view. Perhaps you’ll change my mind on the issue.
    I am unlikely to change your mind for the simple reason that you have got no qualms about DELETING my point of view, and would further, in the unlikely event of you ever being in a position to do so, have no problem in countenancing my being made to conform to your mistaken and ludicrous views through threats of censorship.
    I, on the other hand, am a democrat, and would not entertain for a second the idea of shutting anyone up, let alone you.
    Incidentally, have you any idea how pathetic you appear to me in your phoney concern for women’s interests?
    Are you not the person who is encouraging your fellow dopey ‘new’ atheists to attend a gig at an American military base? What was it you called those state-sponsored thugs and murderers? Oh yes, ‘good people’.
    Tell me, what’s worse: Using the word cunt completely bereft of any hateful connotations or intentions in regard to women, or sanctioning and applauding those who, at the behest of a religious nut, are responsible for wrecking their already impoverished lives through murdering and maiming their children and husbands?
    Go ahead, tell me. You hypocritical cunt.
    Yours sincerely,
    Nigel McCullough

     

  • A visit to exotic Whitechapel

    A strange article by Jemima Khan in The New Statesman on what she calls “Asian” marriage but discusses mostly as Muslim or Islamic marriage.

    Marriage Asian-style is practical, contractual and, to the western mind, deeply unromantic. “The spinster crisis is an issue of modernity,” preaches an energetically gesticulating man in a white prayer cap, jacket and trainers. “Success is the right attitude – no conspiracies, please. Can’t blame Israel.” Cue laughs from those assembled: women in hijabs seated on one side of the wood-panelled hall; men, mostly in suits, a few of them in Arab dress with beards, on the other; chaperones at the back.

    The speaker is Mizan Raja, the engaging founder of the UK-based Islamic Travels agency, who also set up the Islamic Circles community network and now presides over the east London Muslim matrimonial scene. I’m at a Practising Muslim event at Toynbee Hall in Whitechapel. According to the network’s website, the event is held four times a year and is “especially geared towards those Muslims who are actually practising, ie, not a ‘fasiq‘ – open sinner – as defined by the classical texts in sharia law”.

    See what I mean by strange? It starts off sounding cheery and vaguely tourist-like, then suddenly veers into the sinister, then reverts to the cheery tourism (Mizan Raja is “engaging”) then goes beyond the sinister into the frankly scary. What are we reading here? A journalistic report on quaint customs in East London or an exposé of theocratic abuses of women’s rights ditto?

    Mizan says he is meeting a need for something that is a duty in Islam. There’s someone for everyone: “Even the disabled have needs” and Islamic Circles holds regular events for them. And increasingly, he says, career women are electing to become “co-wives” – in other words, to become a man’s second or third wife.

    And the “duty in Islam” is what? Being married? Being married no matter what, including not wanting to be married? Apparently.

    Home Office figures show that Muslim men bring almost 12,000 women to Britain as spouses from the Middle East and the subcontinent every year. One reason for this is the perception that women with careers tend to be “a bit lippy” and don’t make good wives, according to Parag Bhargava, a moustachioed natty dresser in blue shirt and sleeveless navy cardigan…

    There it is again, the mix of the travelogue and the sinister. “The perception” is clearly that women who think they are people too “don’t make good wives” – which indicates to me that we’re talking about men who don’t make good husbands. Jemima Khan, however, gives no sign of noticing.

    For his efforts, Mizan has been spat at in the street and punched by hardliners who believe that free mixing of the sexes is taboo in Islam. “I’m a businessman, not a bloody imam – but I’ve had to marry people when the imam won’t,” he tells me. At least I think he tells me: he refuses to look me in the eye and politely answers my questions by addressing the man to my right.

    Politely? Politely? Oy.

  • Helen Lewis pays tribute to Peter Cook

    Equity wanted him to change his name. Fine, replied Cook. I will instead be known as Xavier Blancmange. Or Wardrobe Gruber. Or Sting Thundercock.

  • The New Scientist lectures atheists on god

    “Religion is deeply etched in human nature and cannot be dismissed as a product of ignorance, indoctrination or stupidity. Until secularists recognise that, they are fighting a losing battle.”

  • Trayvon Martin shooting case goes to State Attorney’s Office

    George Zimmerman told police he acted in self defense when he fatally shot Trayvon Martin Feb. 26 in a gated community.